Patterico's Pontifications

1/26/2015

Rand Paul on Romney Candidacy: “No, no, no!”

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 7:59 am



Rand Paul says “no, no, no!” to a Mitt Romney candidacy:

As recently as October, Ann Romney was poo-pooing the notion of a third Mitt Romney candidacy. After two failed presidential bids, in 2008 and 2012, she and her husband had “moved on,” she told ABC News.

Though sources close to Mitt Romney recently announced he’s once again “thinking about” another bid for the White House, at least one of Romney’s GOP colleagues thinks Ann Romney had the right idea.

“I’m with Ann Romney on this one: No, no, no, no, never,” Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., told ABC News’ Jonathan Karl at a forum of three likely 2016 presidential candidates in Palm Springs, California, Sunday night.

Romney “would have made a great president,” added Paul, rumored to be considering his own White House bid. “But to win the presidency you have the reach out and appeal to new constituencies. And I just don’t think it’s possible.”

I’m with Ann Romney and Rand Paul on this one.

Meanwhile, the Washington Post went to a conference on secession in Houston for the purpose of writing a “Ron Paul is still crazy and he’s Rand Paul’s dad!” piece.

I’ll start with the fact that the writing in the piece is atrocious. A sentence just trails off with no punctuation at the end:

At the same time, Ron, 79, has embraced a role as libertarianism’s prophet of doom, telling his supporters that the United States is headed for catastrophes — and might actually need catastrophes to get on the right track

A word is missing from another:

Ron Paul’s solution, it appears, is to invite more calamity so that Americans are forced realize that the system is broken.

Brion McClanahan’s name is misspelled:

“If Texas wanted to secede and they wanted to join Mexico, I think they can do that. There’s nothing stopping them,” said Brion McLanahan, another speaker.

But if you look deeper, the hatchet job premise of the article is also clear. I may disagree with Ron Paul on foreign policy, but he is dead-on when it comes to secession. The states have the right to engage in it, and I made some of the arguments in this post about splitting New York in two, and this one about Scotland’s vote for independence.

One of the benefits of the vote on Scottish independence is that it helps re-establish a common-sense principle: a smaller political unit is allowed to choose whether to break away from a larger one. Nobody really thinks twice about the concept that Scotland was allowed to decide for itself whether to remain part of the United Kingdom. If they wanted to stay (and they did), fine. If they wanted to break away — well, that would have been fine too.

But if anyone suggests that a state should have the right to vote to break away from the United States, that person is necessarily Certifiably Insane.

That’s the premise of the WaPo article, and it’s typical hackery. The press will continue to try to embarrass Paul by misportraying his dad’s positions — just as they did to Ted Cruz. (Debunking the Cruz nonsense is beyond the scope of this post, but I have listened to the actual remarks and they were misreported. Don’t worry; this will come up again, and I’ll blog it then.)

I know, I know. Big Media being hacks. What else is new?

But we have to keep pointing it out. Every time.

203 Responses to “Rand Paul on Romney Candidacy: “No, no, no!””

  1. Never hurriedly write a post in which you criticize someone else’s proofreading, because if you do, you are really asking for it.

    Just violated the rule. Let the cringing begin!

    Patterico (9c670f)

  2. Regarding the topic, it’s AAALLLL about low information voters, memes, and confirming biases on the Left. It’s all cheerleading, not reporting.

    Simon Jester (c8876d)

  3. Doctors get cranky when their patients don’t follow their prescriptions. Nurses too. I’ve had one tell me she’d cut my morphine if I didn’t take the Ducolax.

    nk (dbc370)

  4. wapo fave barack obama’s dad was pure drunk-ass communist loser-trash so i’m not sure where they’re going with this exactly

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  5. You just set yourself up big time, nk, but I’m going to let it go by. That’s what friends do.;-)

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  6. It continues to be a real head scratcher why so many people think Ron Paul is nuttier than squirrel poop, but if someone can find a nugget in his pile of policy scat to agree with, God bless them.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  7. The problem with Ron Paul has always been that with the things a president can do immediately — foreign policy and the armed forces — Ron is TERRIBLE, and the things on which he is good, he has to deal with Congress and the courts, which is is also TERRIBLE at doing.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  8. *… which HE is also …

    proofreading indeed.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  9. I see nothing wrong with Romney standing as a candidate. He’s probably not what they party wants, but so what? I’m more worried about the brand damaging retread loser loons that are also coming back. And yes, Rick, I am looking at you.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  10. Spellcheck is so overrated.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  11. Wait a minute. It is now safe to use his real name on the internet, Ron Paul, instead of Nor Laup without concern for unleashing the Paulbots? Nobody tells me anything.

    elissa (7700c8)

  12. Ron Paul makes me nervous. He seems to be the leading panderer trying to enlarge the party of doom.

    mg (31009b)

  13. i like Rand ok i guess but i think one-term senators what want to be president are just kind of sad like fat girls what want to pole dance

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  14. mg–speaking of doom–are you and yours all prepared for the historic blizzard?

    elissa (7700c8)

  15. i heard they banned vehicular traffic at noon today in manhattan

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  16. It is not for Rand Paul to tell us who should run. Rather it is for Paul to tell the voters why he is the best candidate. Good luck, Mr. Paul.

    David Lentz (b4deba)

  17. fat girls what want to pole dance

    Preteens would be closer to it. First they need to learn what the hokey-pokey is all about.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  18. historic blizzard

    I wonder if it will hit a dry 80 degrees again today here in SoCal.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  19. Rather it is for Paul to tell the voters why he is the best candidate.

    This.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  20. If that’s a hit piece, they suck at it. I could do a lot better.

    The Ron Paul Institute has said that 9/11 was an inside job and (for three days, and defending it before they took it down) that the Charlie Hebdo hit was likely a false flag operation carrying the hallmarks of Mossad. Decades back, the Ron Paul newsletters suggested ditching the gun after shooting “criminal” teens (’cause cops don’t like white people), and suggested that it was government’s job to control driving privileges, at least to the extent of denying it to gays.

    At this point, even Reason has their hackles up: http://reason.com/blog/2015/01/15/ron-paul-institute-publishes-a-charlie-h This sort of conspiracy-of-Jews stuff just never stops.

    There’s only so much crazy we can take. Too. Much. Crazy.

    JRM (cd0a37)

  21. “the United States is headed for catastrophes — and might actually need catastrophes to get on the right track”

    OMG ! I agree with Paul on something.

    Mike K (90dfdc)

  22. LOL – the Ron Paul Institute. Crazy, indeed.

    carlitos (c24ed5)

  23. yes elissa, enough wood inside to last 3-4 days depending on wind chill. Plenty of vittles. Snow shoes are out. My wife is supposed to fly out of Boston on Wed. a.m. Could be an issue. Thanks for asking. Wish our puppy was old enough to come home.

    mg (31009b)

  24. the Paul family AND Mittens need to just STFU and go away…

    redc1c4 (dab236)

  25. “There’s only so much crazy we can take. Too. Much. Crazy.”

    JRM – Dude, don’t worry about that other cray cray stuff, Nor Luap is SPOT.ON. on when it comes to secession, plus he’s an advocate for smaller government and FIAT MONEY is going to kill us all.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  26. Paul Craig Roberts, the author of that ditty, was a former Reagan Treasury official, but do we really want to examine atrocity denialists in the Democratic party

    narciso (ee1f88)

  27. mg- good luck with your new Chessie pup. They are wonderful dogs. Many years ago we adopted a 10 week old Lab-Chessie that was the result of an “unplanned pregnancy” from the accidental union of a purebred black Lab and a purebred Chesapeake Bay Retriever. She was a fabulous dog. She obviously loved the water and jumping off the back of the boat. Her coat was gorgeous. She was smart and she had the sweet easy-going Lab disposition, but with just a touch of the Chesapeake need for dominance baked in to keep things interesting. A couple years later we adopted a purebred black Lab as a companion for her and they got along great… except for once in a while when the half-Chessie’s willfulness would come out, and the Labrador would look at her as if to say “who are you”

    elissa (7700c8)

  28. congrats mg:

    so this is sort of a pattern with this reporter

    washposts-fahrenthold-okeefe-mock-insanity-house-gop-push-repeal-obama

    narciso (ee1f88)

  29. I don’t think Ron Paul ia nutty. I think he just sticks to something “consistent” as a matter of policy and he knows he is wrong. Does he ever correct himself?

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  30. from the abc link above

    “I don’t just mean that comment,” Cruz said. “The central narrative of the last election, what the voters heard, was, ‘We don’t have to worry about the 47 percent.’ And I think Republicans are and should be the party of the 47 percent.

    i hate romney a lot he disgusts me

    but the central narrative of his campaign was about how he was a proven, competent manager

    Cruz sounds stupid

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  31. ==I don’t think Ron Paul ia nutty.==

    I don’t think I’d be going around saying that in public, Sammy.

    elissa (7700c8)

  32. historic blizzard

    I wonder if it will hit a dry 80 degrees again today here in SoCal.

    Kevin M (25bbee) — 1/26/2015 @ 10:14 am

    Hey, you SoCalers got some wind and rain a few days ago, so don’t be getting all uppity, now.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  33. well it didn’t help him.

    narciso (ee1f88)

  34. I am going to take issue with the owner on this one. Willard and Jebbie can corner Big Donor crony cashola and beat each other to death for all I care.

    If that sideshow detracts from foreign policy light-weight RaPaul’s dog and pony act so much the better.

    Domestic policy will not distinguish men from pretenders in this go around.

    DNF (900924)

  35. thanks elissa and narciso
    My wife named him” Sir Winston”.
    We will get him a brother in a year or two.

    mg (31009b)

  36. Mr. Governor Scott Walker, he is the future

    Sarah Palin was a tragic tragic incoherent bombogenesis

    everyone hates porky porky chris christie

    oh for the love of god this hasn’t even started yet

    did you know they make sammin vodka?

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  37. happyfeet (a037ad) — 1/26/2015 @ 12:45 pm

    Sarah Palin was a tragic tragic incoherent bombogenesis

    Her teleprompter malfunctioned, and she tried to ad lib.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  38. lox of luck with that vodka, happy feet

    mg (31009b)

  39. 37. Guvner Walker is hogtied being a loyal Repugnant. Being tight with Ryan and Johnson earns him no establishment cred while trashing any TEA cachet.

    He must win IA and place in SC.

    DNF (900924)

  40. ha I see what you did there

    for reals I’m a lil intrigued

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  41. when i want iowa’s input i’ll ask for it

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  42. Rushbo said Walker’s speech at some Iowa thing was impressive, but I didn’t get to hear the clips myself.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  43. 20. JRM (cd0a37) — 1/26/2015 @ 10:33 am

    The Ron Paul Institute has said…the Charlie Hebdo hit was likely a false flag operation carrying the hallmarks of Mossad.

    A false flag operation run by Putin is a very real possibility, given the Russian propaganda about it, and the connections to Chechens. And Putin did something like that in 1999 in Moscow.

    http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2012/nov/22/finally-we-know-about-moscow-bombings/

    I might add that I think the Ron Paul Institute echoes Russian propaganda.

    http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/featured-articles/2014/july/20/what-the-media-won-t-report-about-malaysian-airlines-flight-mh17/

    They will not report that the crisis in Ukraine started late last year, when EU and US-supported protesters plotted the overthrow of the elected Ukrainian president, Viktor Yanukovych. Without US-sponsored “regime change,” it is unlikely that hundreds would have been killed in the unrest that followed. Nor would the Malaysian Airlines crash have happened.

    The media has reported that the plane must have been shot down by Russian forces or Russian-backed separatists, because the missile that reportedly brought down the plane was Russian made. But they will not report that the Ukrainian government also uses the exact same Russian-made weapons.

    Now I guess you can’t call Ron Paul a Communist agent, or fellow traveler, because not even Putin is a Communist! But he’s maybe an agent of the Russian government. Among maybe other funding sources. I don’t know where he gets his money but sometimes you see where he gets his ideas.

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  44. It could even be that the whole idea of having lunatics say it was a false flag operation could be to get everyone to dismiss the very thought it was some sort of false flag operation.

    (I think they also mix up what a false flag operation means. It isn’t that everybody involved knows who their true bosses are – quite the opposite in fact.)

    Now, in contradiction to the idea the Charlie Hebdo attack was a Putin false flag operation,
    there seems to be at least anonymous New York Times source that claims to be a member of Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula who claims knowledge of the operation. He told the New York Times that the terrorists who said they was from Al Qaeda in Yemen was telling the truth and the one who said he was from ISIS was also telling the truth, and they worked together because they knew each other personally but not because the two organizations were working together, and yes AQAP commssioned the Charlie Hebdo attack.

    Now the Charlie Hebdo attackers had been associated with AQAP – 3 years before! They seem to have been reactivated in the middle of 2014. Their actual real connection with anyone in Yemen lapsed in 2011.

    They got their money now – and their wesapons – from Amedy Coulibaly….who thought he was taking orders from ISIS. He may not have told them he was from ISIS, though – and right there you have afalse flag operation: ISIS getting terrorists connected with al Qaeda to do their dirty work, thinking they are doing it for al Qaeda when actually they are doing it for ISIS.

    Coulibaly was working with people in Belguim said to be from ISIS. But these people in Belguim were taking orders from Chechens. And that’s as much as I know.

    But…

    Was it really ISIS? Now the question is who are these Chechens really connected to.

    I even have this:

    https://pietervanostaeyen.wordpress.com/2013/09/07/chechen-jihadis-in-syria-thrown-out-of-isis/

    But maybe they were discovered stealing. Or maybe even of being Russia spies.

    Because I found this too:

    ISIS recently executed some people on grojnds of being Russia spies: CNN: ISIS video claims to show boy executing two men accused of being Russian spies

    The video’s title is “Uncovering an Enemy Within” and states that “enemies thought that they could dispatch spies and agents to plot against the Islamic State, but Allah disgraced their efforts and thwarted their plans.”

    Let’s say the Chechens who split from ISIS split because ISIS was getting suspicious of them, although maybe they only suspected them of stealing. But they were Russian spies.

    Now maybe they went back to Europe and set up this terror plot, using some inside information (as to who was affiliated with terrorist groups) some obtained from the west, in order to scare the west into limiting the sanctions against Russia.

    Good catch?? Or a rabbit hole?

    http://www.cnn.com/2015/01/14/middleeast/isis-video-boy-execution-russian-spies/

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  45. The next tranche keeping owners of Greek public debt afloat must come by July/August.

    Wait for it if you’re an optimist.

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-01-26/greeces-new-leader-sends-germany-loud-and-clear-message-his-first-act

    DNF (900924)

  46. POaul Krugman has actually a good article. The austerity was based on the assumption that it would not depress Greek GDP.

    I would say this could never have worked without amassive expansion of business loaning,

    Sammy Finkelman (d22d64)

  47. Just realized I have the same opinion regarding Romney as Paul, and the same writing style as Fahrenthold.

    Can’t sing, ain’t pretty, and my legs are thin.

    papertiger (c2d6da)

  48. “misportraying” Ron Paul’s positions? Hardly.

    If you think he is sane, you are not.

    Estragon (ada867)

  49. 32. What I think Ron Paul is…is dishonest, especially intellectually. Not stupid. Not actually nutty.

    Sammy Finkelman (e806a6)

  50. No, no, no!

    That’s what I used to think. Right up until Shakira crushed this Mustang

    Why, Mr. feets? For the love of God, why?

    Steve57 (a04df5)

  51. There is a funny video of hitler commenting on romneys third run. google hitler on romney running again.

    nuke mecca (fda4f7)

  52. There’s the fart in church.

    Let’s try again. National [S-O-C-I-A-L-I-S-T] party.

    When in doubt which side of the political fence Hitler sat refer to bracketed.

    papertiger (c2d6da)

  53. Re: RoPaul nutter.

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-01-26/you-do-not-get-moves-unless-stuff-hitting-fan

    Caveat lector, it’s an advert. Tarring economist RoPaul with racist RoPaul or opportunist RoPaul or isolationist RoPaul views is disingenuous at best and reveals nothing about asyla inmates escaping scrutiny.

    DNF (900924)

  54. Mr.Feets, if you want to explore the salmon connection further there is this…
    http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,2069.msg856267.html#msg856267
    Further to your comment about Cruz’s critique of Romney’s campaign. He was right. The voters heard nothing else. The MSM made sure that none of them forgot that bit about the 47 percent. Romney’s efforts to establish a fifferent meme made no headway.

    kishnevi (3719b7)

  55. And while Glenmorangie is good, Aberlour Abunadh is awesome. Just saying…

    kishnevi (a5d1b9)

  56. i’m fascinated by that sammin

    bookmarked i’ll poke around downtown this week

    happyfeet (831175)

  57. We’re all on our own. Y’all do realize that, right?

    Steve57 (a04df5)

  58. The man who posted it lives in Westphalia. I have no idea if it is available stateside. Although with your own bottle of Glenmorangie, you could probably produce a reasonable approximation on your own.

    kishnevi (294553)

  59. Mr. 57 you’re forgetting Katy Perry

    what color you think her hair will be on sunday?

    happyfeet (831175)

  60. Get a bottle of Everclear and some baby water. Then get all your favorite flavors and spices that you can think of including chips off those cedar planks you grilled your salmon on. You can make any booze you like, except brandy or wine. For ouzo use anise if you can find it, or just strong licorice candy. For gin, use juniper. For vodka, have a Russian girl dip her feet in it.

    nk (dbc370)

  61. peabnut bubber vodka would be too cool for school

    happyfeet (831175)

  62. nobody said “a thousand times no” ?

    seeRpea (1d44c7)

  63. Just watched Bret Stephens let Bill Maher box himself in on several issues before going in for the kill each time and quite enjoyed it. Normally, I can’t stomach more than one minute of that asshole Maher, but this was so deliciously special to see that “Fraggle Rock” look of befuddlement wash over Maher’s face numerous times.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  64. Stephens really let Maher have it after Maher all but said the movie “American Sniper” was drek for the yahoos. I saw the movie last week and – if you haven’t seen it yet – do go see it. It’s a powerful piece of film making, better than the book, which I also read.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  65. If that’s a hit piece, they suck at it. I could do a lot better.

    The Ron Paul Institute has said that 9/11 was an inside job and (for three days, and defending it before they took it down) that the Charlie Hebdo hit was likely a false flag operation carrying the hallmarks of Mossad. Decades back, the Ron Paul newsletters suggested ditching the gun after shooting “criminal” teens (’cause cops don’t like white people), and suggested that it was government’s job to control driving privileges, at least to the extent of denying it to gays.

    At this point, even Reason has their hackles up: http://reason.com/blog/2015/01/15/ron-paul-institute-publishes-a-charlie-h This sort of conspiracy-of-Jews stuff just never stops.

    There’s only so much crazy we can take. Too. Much. Crazy.

    Yes. Here is what Matt Welch says in the piece you link, and I largely agree with him:

    I have tremendous respect for Ron Paul, who has been named a “Hero of Freedom” by both the magazine I edit and the television show I co-host; you can read a Q&A I conducted with him on foreign policy as recently as October. And I have the opposite of respect for some of the people who have written and published some seriously bizarre commentary over the years in organizations that carry his name. Bad arguments–including/especially any from me or the staff of this magazine–do not deserve a free pass merely by dint of being ideologically simpatico.

    Before I actually read a couple of books by Ron Paul, I fell victim to the “he’s just a lunatic” line that is pushed by many on the right. It doesn’t help that, in pushing his noninterventionist foreign policy — a viewpoint that I am often sympathetic to, but that I often disagree with — he and his fellow travelers sometimes give too much credence to the worst of the anti-war left. Juan Cole, to these people, is a serious person to be listened to. But there is much, much more to Ron Paul than that.

    But he has been badly used by some of the loonier people in his crowd, and (like many of us) he is perhaps inclined to excuse certain viewpoints held by his friends because, well, they’re his friends. And we are often loyal to our friends even when, occasionally, they get us rolling our eyes a little bit when they go off on a pet rant on a subject dear to them as to which we totally disagree with them.

    I normally wouldn’t spend much time arguing about Ron Paul as a person, as its his ideas that matter more — but it’s clear that he is going to be a target of anyone looking to criticize Rand Paul. So it’s a looming issue, like it or not.

    Patterico (9c670f)

  66. “misportraying” Ron Paul’s positions? Hardly.

    If you think he is sane, you are not.

    Yes, misportraying his positions. In particular, the WaPo writer portrays Paul as eager for the country to go over a cliff so he and his ilk can remake it. But that’s just not so. Paul has been warning of the dangerous path this country has been taking for a very long time. The fact that he (and folks like me who agree with him that we are headed for the cliff) look for some silver lining in this cloud (that maybe some sensible policies will take root in the aftermath of the collapse) does not mean we are rooting for the cloud.

    That’s just nasty, mean-spirited, and ignorant on the WaPo writer’s part.

    Patterico (9c670f)

  67. JRM – Dude, don’t worry about that other cray cray stuff, Nor Luap is SPOT.ON. on when it comes to secession, plus he’s an advocate for smaller government and FIAT MONEY is going to kill us all.

    Absolutely.

    And yet, something about your tone seems to suggest that you aren’t being entirely serious.

    I am happy to debate any of these issues with you, daleyrocks.

    Patterico (9c670f)

  68. There is a funny video of hitler commenting on romneys third run. google hitler on romney running again.

    Mmm . . . the one I found was not funny. Good idea, bad execution.

    Patterico (9c670f)

  69. I just can’t see the co-existence of open borders and isolationism or open borders and secession. Or is not Ron Paul in favor of open borders? Open national borders where people of one nation can walk into another nation and bring things with them that they are allowed to sell there including their labor.

    nk (dbc370)

  70. nk@70
    He is for open borders under ideal conditions which do not exist currently.
    http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/featured-articles/2014/july/13/what-s-missing-in-the-current-immigration-cyrisis-debate/

    kishnevi (294553)

  71. nk,

    Open borders
    Welfare state
    Democracy

    Pick any two. Guess which one Ron would be shut of.

    Kevin M (25bbee)

  72. I’d loves me some of dat Fiat money, always got room for another old sports car

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  73. I see him as an anarcho-libertarian, Kevin.

    But I don’t see how you can have democracy with universal suffrage and not have a welfare state so I’m kind of in a fringe, too.

    nk (dbc370)

  74. “I am happy to debate any of these issues with you, daleyrocks.”

    Patterico – Thank you for the kind offer. I will pass.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  75. Lots of folks curiously denounce secession at home and cheer for self-determination abroad. When 13 English colonies seceded from Great Britain, the French cheered for American Independence but the Brits went to war to preserve their union.

    Then, even more curiously, while waging a War Against Secession the North encouraged West Virginia to secede from Virginia. The North cheered for that (good) secession while repeatedly sending invasion Armies to Virginia to prevent (bad) secession.

    Instead of seceding, maybe the Confederate States should have simply sought self-determination.

    ropelight (79435c)

  76. I liked Ron Paul as a Congressman because he brought a different perspective to Congress, was willing to stand up for his ideas, and did what his constituents wanted him to do. I don’t agree with him on foreign policy issues but he’s not in Congress anymore. I don’t think it’s fair to act like Rand = Ron, but of course the media will compare them in an effort to hurt Rand.

    However, I think it’s fair to ask Rand about the issues, and he’s going to have to distance himself from his father at some point. George W. Bush had a similar problem in the 2000 election because he was running against Steve Forbes’ flat tax and was saddled with his father’s “Read My Lips” tax reversal. His solution was to campaign on and promise tax cuts. Rand Paul may have to learn from that and do something similar.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  77. The ‘South’ thought they could win a war with the ‘North’ (and had England supported them as had been unofficially promised maybe they would have) so this quicker route was taken.
    There was a semi-good chance that they could have seceded by taking the self-determination route , which also may have defanged a good part of the Constitutional argument that the North used. But it would have taken a while plus a lot of the Territories would not have been available to them anyway.

    Then again, unless the Confederacy of the South would have abolished slavery there would have been a war anyway.

    Civil Wars are by definition nasty and somewhat illogical. We would have been better off without one but worse off without it once the South started it.

    seeRpea (1d44c7)

  78. #78, seeR, slavery ended everywhere all over Central and South America without resorting to warfare, wouldn’t it have ended just as naturally in the US as well?

    ropelight (79435c)

  79. The Civil War was nothing more than Northern bourgeoise plutocrats destroying the South’s nascent Socialism and sundering the black proletariat of the South from their cradle to grave security only to oppress and exploit them as a permanent underclass along with poor immigrants at slave wages and under miserable living conditions afterward.

    nk (dbc370)

  80. Wow, just as I was about to put the Mittster (er school mate back in high school) to bed along comes Rand Paul bad-mouthing him. I can’t think of a better recommendation at the moment. (I figure Obama’s mishandling of the Muslim sponsored terror, wars, and atrocities is a pale shadow of how well Rand Paul could mishandle them.)

    {^_^}

    JDow (770dee)

  81. Well, yes. Mitt Romney should not be the the Presidential candidate and Rand Paul should not be President.

    nk (dbc370)

  82. re #79: maybe after a few decades but definitely not before the existing problems of expansion would have caused lots more problems. Probably would have been a Northern backed slave rebellion if not all out Civil War. And keep in mind that slavery in Africa kept on going.

    seeRpea (1d44c7)

  83. Regarding secession, it seems to me when you enter a compact, you need to use the same formality in order to exit the compact. Straight-forward contract law.

    Thus, if it took 2/3 vote of all members to initiate the compact, or to later join the compact, it would take the same vote to exit the compact, barring some specific mechanism set forth in the compact to dissolve it.

    The fact of the matter, the Founders understood contract law, they even understood forming compacts – the lack of a written exit mechanism was intended, so I would argue the only way to validly sunder the compact is with a vote. Unilaterally leaving a contract is a breach.

    When you have formed a nation by agreement, to include laws against treason against the nation formed, unilateral secession fits the written definition of treason stated in the Constitution. R. E. Lee expressly admitted as such, and lead the armies of the Rebels, knowing failure of their course of action would be considered treason.

    It’s not really complicated.

    Steve Malynn (6b1ce5)

  84. 79. In the Unoted States, they started saing around 1840 hatslavery was a positive good, or at least not wrong, and nbdy cold dispute that. Then they found out in 1861, that nobody could dispute the wisdom or advisability of secession either. Well, maybe Sam Houston, but he couldn’t stop it.

    Secession took place because southern politicians who defended slavery and wanted to extend its range – which was all of them – were about to become pariahs on the national stage. They could never aspire to Cabinet positions and would lose all votes on other issues than slavery. Lincoln felt an obligation – he was in fact sworn to it – not to let the country split becaue of ambitious people.

    Sammy Finkelman (e806a6)

  85. 84. Except that nine states and more, in effect seceded from the Articles of Confederation in 1787 and 1788.

    Sammy Finkelman (e806a6)

  86. Sammy, the Founders expected slavery to fade away, not be false justification for a competing combination. The demise of the original Confederation was that all the parties abandoned it. The representatives negotiated a new Constitution with a good deal more formality in the ratification process, that included one federal crime: Treason. You are turning common law on its head to argue a group is justified to commit what is a crime for an individual.

    Steve Malynn (b696b3)

  87. Probably would have been a Northern backed slave rebellion if not all out Civil War.

    It would not have been in the interests of the Northern capitalist plutocrats for the Southern proletariat to rise and seize the means of production for themselves, which is why they foreclosed any possibility of this happening by creating a casus belli to invade the South, seizing control of it for themselves, and evicting both the paternalist oligarchical owners and the former workers who had relied on them for their sustenance, replacing the first with their carpetbagger and scalawag running dogs and the second with convict and immigrant slave labor.

    nk (dbc370)

  88. 54. RoPaul economist, cont.

    Emerging Markets have borrowed $5 Trillion USD ahead of this 20% deflation of the euro and there own currency.

    Germany repatriated 130 tons of its gold from the NY Fed over the last 6 mo., Russia purchased 65 tons, Iran is taking only gold for its oil, China and India, meanwhile, are the biggest buyers as in years past.

    The petrodollar is effectively dead, Russia just announced that it will use its $50 Billion in petrodollars to defend the ruble.

    ECB QE and the crushing of the euro ends Sept. 2016. I see an end to the global desire for USD along with the euro and yen roughly then.

    Have a wonderful day.

    DNF (900924)

  89. The Sarah Palin Ad for 2016

    Sarah Palin might run for president, and her speech this weekend in Iowa offered a preview at what her campaign might look like. So we cut her first ad for the 2016 race.
    Bloomberg Video

    looks like a propaganda slut at bloomberg needs a refill on his adderall scrip

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  90. “I am happy to debate any of these issues with you, daleyrocks.”

    Patterico – Thank you for the kind offer. I will pass.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 1/26/2015 @ 8:49 pm

    It sounds like you’re saying you’re willing to mock the views, but not refute them. That sounds a lot like what the WaPo reporter did in the piece linked in the post.

    Patterico (89b937)

  91. she had a good run

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  92. “It sounds like you’re saying you’re willing to mock the views, but not refute them. That sounds a lot like what the WaPo reporter did in the piece linked in the post.”

    Patterico – It may sound that way, but I have no interest in reading any more of Ron Paul’s excreta than I did prior to the 2008 election, which would be necessary to have a reasoned debate with you about his views on the subject mentioned. Just not on my bucket list.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  93. “The fact of the matter, the Founders understood contract law, they even understood forming compacts – the lack of a written exit mechanism was intended, so I would argue the only way to validly sunder the compact is with a vote. Unilaterally leaving a contract is a breach.”

    – Steve Malynn

    Not that I necessarily accept the analogy, but wouldn’t the argument be that a breach by one party justifies the remedy of rescission by the other? Then it’s just an argument about what constitutes a “breach,” without a judge to decide the matter, and we quickly revert to a more nuts-and-bolts paradigm.

    Leviticus (f9a067)

  94. Societies are consensual. Contract law has nothing to do with it. It’s friends and families rules.

    nk (dbc370)

  95. “It sounds like you’re saying you’re willing to mock the views, but not refute them.”

    Patterico – I think we’ve had several discussions on fractional reserve banking and fiat money, but cherry picking a few of Ron Paul’s less crazy positions to debate in my view is sort of like saying Idi Amin was a real monster overall, but he was kind to animals and favored protecting the environment. I cannot take somebody like Ron Paul who said during 2012 that our border fence is to keep Americans in rather than immigrants illegal out among his other loonier pronouncements seriously no matter how much you may like his positions on a couple of issues.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  96. RE: 96 & 97

    Specific Performance is also a valid contract remedy.

    Interpretation of Constitutions and Contracts traditionally follow the same rules of construction – you know that nk.

    Further nk, you ignore my point re: how can you have legislated the terms of Treason in the compact, if mere withholding consent of one party vitiates the union?

    Yes, Societies are consensual – which is why in a country with a functioning mechanism for popular rule, secession is oxymoronic. The problem with the “consensual” excuse as applied to the Southern Rebels – they were a slave society that barred participation of a large plurality of their inhabitants.

    Salmon Chase’s opinion describes my position well, although I disagree with his analysis of the original articles of Confederation, in Texas v. White 1869. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_v._White

    Chase also pointed out that the Constitution required that the Federal Government guarantee that the states maintained a republican form of government. I don’t think he addressed the supremacy clause – though I would argue that it is also germane.

    Following the Declaration of Independence, self-determination is essential – but even then it is not sufficient to sunder political ties. So if self-determination is undermined by despots, our Declarations advises we have just reason to revolt – you cannot make the same claim if your complaint is that the democratically selected government pursues policies you and your family do not like.

    Steve Malynn (6b1ce5)

  97. Patterico, I have to agree with daleyrocks regarding the Paul family. Ron Paul does not support America as much as he supports his political theory of “Libertarinaism”.

    I think his myopia is best shown by his foreign policy stance, especially when he and his acolytes theorize “blowback.”

    I’ll share a point I made on another site regarding the connection between the libertarians arguing “blowback” and Paul’s statements on the death of Chris Kyle, Ron Paul said:

    “Chris Kyle’s death seems to confirm that “he who lives by the sword dies by the sword.” Treating PTSD at a firing range doesn’t make sense”

    Paul’s obscene insult upon the death of Chris Kyle is exactly the same insult as the slander of “Blowback”. It is blaming the victim taken to the highest level of insult – justifying insult by scripture. That you do not understand the insult is pathetic, it shows your lack of empathy, your devotion to an irrational politics, your ignorance of the facts of the real world, your ignorance of scripture and the complete lack of understanding of the underlying ethos of the US Military.

    Your comment is a home run of ignorance, a hat trick of insultingly pious hypocrisy.

    First, while warriors, it is not true that the US Military “lives by the sword” as the scriptures describe. That rebuke by Jesus to Peter is the most direct statement that Christianity shall not be enforced with the Sword, but by the word of God. Jesus was not condemning all soldiers to death, as you and Ron Paul (and so many others who wish to insult Christianity) would irrationally interpret the Gospel. He was saying if you make the tool of violence your focus you will be ended by the same.

    Luckily we know that the focus of the US Military, as powerful as it is, is not simple violence. EVERY Member of the US Military makes this oath:

    (a) Enlistment Oath.— Each person enlisting in an armed force shall take the following oath:
    “I, (state name of enlistee), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.”

    (b) Who May Administer.— The oath may be taken before the President, the Vice-President, the Secretary of Defense, any commissioned officer, or any other person designated under regulations prescribed by the Secretary of Defense.

    So the ethos of the US military is service to OTHERS, not the Sword. The scripture that most closely encapsulates the Ethic of the US Military is John 15:13 – Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.

    Both Ron Paul’s statement and your defense of it show conclusively that Libertarians share the Liberal willful ignorance and disdain of the US Military.

    Both Ron Paul’s statement and your defense of it show the arrogance and underlying opportunism of your stance, and the entire lie that is “Blowback.”

    Ron Paul is a retired OB/GYN – he could not diagnose PTSD or prescribe treatment any more than I as a retired infantry officer; less actually, as I have real life experience with these issues that he does not.

    There is no part of Ron Paul that honors Veterans, he has turned his back on us, as do most if not all “Libertarians”.

    There is nothing that Ron Paul has said that can redeem his fundamental lack of understanding of service to the Nation, not his ego.

    Steve Malynn (6b1ce5)

  98. 93. “Conservative bloggers'”

    Cap’n Morrissey is an Eagan, MN product I know well an Timmy Pawlenty shill. Gabe Malor is an Ace contributor of no particular repute beyond Establishment suck azz.

    Neither were ever in Cuda’s court and conservative is not an honest description of their drift.

    A commenter of less impeachable merit, VDH, has accounted her a force on the Right in perpetuity. Look no further than Ted Cruz for her close collaborators.

    When she drops her Fox contract you may consider her play for a dubious honor serious.

    DNF (51bba7)

  99. There’s a reason there are words and phrases like “oeuvre” or “body of work” for us to weigh and establish the seriousness and bonafides of artists, writers, musicians, philosophers, inventors, researchers,—–and statesmen/politicians over a period of time. I’m with daleyrocks on this one. Nor Laup has his moments and is probably right on some things, but his over all lack of consistency from topic to topic and the crazy-sounding things that have been popping out of his mouth for years are troublesome, confusing and often contradictory. One hopes that his nuttiness was not genetically transmitted, but in my opinion his son is going to have to figure out how to explain, or else publicly peel away from his dad and some of his dad’s pronouncements, if he’d like to be a serious contender for the presidency. I’m not sure Rand is up for doing that.

    elissa (623f70)

  100. Patterico, I have to agree with daleyrocks regarding the Paul family.

    Steve Malynn – My comments were only with respect to Ron Paul. Please do not imply otherwise.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  101. I like Sarah. She is interesting. I think she is a force of nature and will be a visible touchstone and inspiration for a lot of conservatives for many years. Cuda also has a “body of work” problem. It is different from Ron Paul’s body of work problem. But she has it, and it is why she’ll not be seriously contending for the U.S. presidency any time soon.

    I’d love to see her test her talents and her appeal and burnish her skills with a run against John McCain for that AZ senate seat, though.

    elissa (623f70)

  102. i think the Sarah bubble has popped and i think it suggests Team R has matured a little to where they’ve moved past that weird obama-envy phase where they needed a charismatic lightweight they could cling to and call their own

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  103. Pardon, daleyrocks, I should not have inferred my disdain of Rand to you. His attempt to reinterpret isolationism as engagement is a farce, so I have no trust in his integrity.

    Steve Malynn (6b1ce5)

  104. Dang, I was looking forward to a long discussion on self-determination, social compact and the Constitution – anyone?

    Steve Malynn (6b1ce5)

  105. After one and a half terms of this grating combination of arrogance and incompetence as President, the American people are crying out for someone who knows what they are doing. That is Romney’s appeal; in countless instances, like the SLC Olympics, he came in and righted the ship. Screw inspiring, or telegenic, or empathic; just give us someone who can keep the lights on!

    Bruce Abbott (32869e)

  106. the American people are not crying out for a freaky weirdo automaton like Mitt Romney

    that’s just not where we are as a people

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  107. “Pardon, daleyrocks, I should not have inferred my disdain of Rand to you.”

    Steve – No big deal. I just wanted to clarify. I’m not fond of Rand’s evolving foreign policy positions but have otherwise not said much about him.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  108. “the American people are not crying out for a freaky weirdo automaton like Mitt Romney”

    Mr. Feets – Just say Mormons or “Those People,” it’s simpler and everybody will still know what you mean.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  109. that’s just

    it’s appallingly reductive is what it is Mr. daley

    and hurtful

    you hurt my feelings when you say stuff like that

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  110. can we be blunt after Zaphod and the Solon’s reelection, the American people are on probation

    narciso (ee1f88)

  111. “you hurt my feelings when you say stuff like that”

    Mr. Feets – You’re not really fooling anybody even if you tell yourself you are.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  112. 1 sec on phone

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  113. I would say for sheer impact, Cruz was no 1, Walker as a new force on the stage, a strong no. 2, and Carson no. 3. the Huntress having been out the longest, was unplugged, in part because she sees how little the party establishment wants to challenge Obama, she’s a little tired of being Cassandra, and all her choices, being examined with an electron microscope, the whole O’Donnell eleventy panic, was in retrospect, over drawn just a mite bit, these cunning cunning plans re the
    budget negotiations, turned out to be not so clever, but more in the foolish side of things

    narciso (ee1f88)

  114. Mr. daley Mitt Romney is not mainstream he is very weird this is why he keeps losing

    he does not have mainstream ideas

    he invents romneycares and wants to negotiate an agreement with China to where America and China will do stuff to make less carbon dioxides and voila the earth cools down and then after that he wants to raise the minimum wage

    what. a. freak.

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  115. Team R, has their trapper keeper open for stay puft and the Medici, so their judgement isn’t solid,

    narciso (ee1f88)

  116. “Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort.”

    Nothing in there about picking up your chips and looking for a new game. Once you’ve left that table, you’re not bound by its rules.

    nk (dbc370)

  117. my favorite one is when the kid stomps on the dog

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  118. Feets is reliably myopic on a host of subjects, daley. And his diet is only fit for pencil-necked geeks and keepers of gerbils.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  119. this is a thing that you can ask amazon to send to your house and you can put it on your wall

    i’m still processing this i have no words just now

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  120. 113. In Deuteronomic baseball it’s two strikes and you’re out.

    This people doesn’t get another chance.

    DNF (70d100)

  121. “Feets is reliably myopic on a host of subjects, daley.”

    Colonel – He doesn’t like it when you point it out, but I believe friends should help friends overcome their blind spots. I am here to help Feets help himself, because the power of Christ compels me and Ima giver.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  122. Today Greece, tomorrow Italy, in two year’s time America.

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-01-27/greece-crossroads-oligarchs-blew-it

    116. Does the hair shirt itch? Wear it well.

    DNF (70d100)

  123. Good link, DNF.

    nk (dbc370)

  124. 127. Almost as good:

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-01-27/medvedev-warns-unlimited-reaction-if-russia-cut-swift

    They’re bluffing, Estonia, they are in ruins.

    Silly Obots, Russia’s oil contracts are denominated in rubles.

    DNF (70d100)

  125. thank you Mr. daley don’t give up on me

    happyfeet (831175)

  126. 127. What continues to amaze is the political class thinks that like the billionaires they will escape unscathed.

    Like DC can be locked up as a fortress and military regulars will blow their parents away to protect the government.

    There are 600 generals and admirals with hardly a patriot among them any more.

    Spose they’ll open the bunker doors to politicos?

    DNF (70d100)

  127. A little more oil on the fire. http://www.cagle.com/working/080917/bagley.jpg

    nk (dbc370)

  128. Not me, happyfeet. I’m going to try and see your point of view and boil some kale. I’m betting that it’s a cross between cabbage and turnip greens. Either way, I’ll eat it with olive oil, lemon and feta. If it’s more like turnip greens, I’ll add two or three cloves of raw garlic.

    nk (dbc370)

  129. “Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort.”

    Nothing in there about picking up your chips and looking for a new game. Once you’ve left that table, you’re not bound by its rules.

    nk (dbc370) — 1/27/2015 @ 3:07 pm

    So, Firing on the Federal Fort in Charleston was a landlord – tenant dispute?

    And all those Southern Military Men, and Office holders who had sworn their oaths to support and defend the constitution, and obey the laws and orders of the Federal Government, those oaths were null and void, at will?

    The Founding of the Union was not a Poker game – there were real and ongoing entanglements between the Federal Government and the States that were abrogated by the various Acts of Secession, and to pretend a separation would not entail armed conflict is naive at best. In fact, to pretend war on the frontier over the expansion of slavery would not have resulted, is in my mind disingenuous.

    But, going back to your initial conceit, self determination, you are not really arguing that a slave state can legitimately claim self determination as justification for leaving the Union?

    No contemporary European nation believed that claim, and had the South actually freed the slaves, they might have gathered outside support for such a “just cause”.

    Which would have then turned their rebellion into a true “libertarian” objective – for no reason, as Slavery was the only dividing issue between the opposing parties.

    I’d argue the South intended to keep slavery, and believed Cotton was King – and that they would outlast and overcome the remaining Union.

    Steve Malynn (6b1ce5)

  130. Well, in the first place, a republic which needs to be maintained by total civil war is not a republic. Let it go, let it go, let it go … just like the song in Frozen.

    And I’m not making a general argument against patriotism. I don’t think the South was right in seceding. They should have stuck it out with the country they were stuck with. I just don’t think that secession violates the “founding contract” in the way you argue it.

    nk (dbc370)

  131. lemme know how you like it i think the garlic is probably the way to go

    but usually i just saute it regular-like

    happyfeet (831175)

  132. Cancelling missile treaties, returning enemy combatants to the field, unilatterally disarming, dropping oversight of our borders, conspiring to trade the President’s Ambassador to an enemy as goodwill, thwarting cleanup of environmental disasters, laundering a nation’s fiscal strength an gifting it to dissipation, provoking arson and mayhem,…

    http://www.nytimes.com/1861/01/25/news/treason-against-the-united-states.html

    I don’t give a phlying phuck whether the Law even be given a chance to prove itself faithful and true.

    Inseam the bastard.

    DNF (70d100)

  133. 136. Unseam.

    DNF (70d100)

  134. Give kale a shot nk, but don’t be afraid to say meh. I do like kale pesto on sandwiches, and adding a few broken up kale leaves to vegetable soup is delish and adds color. It’s leaves are tougher but you can cook it like spinach or put it in any recipe, really, that calls for spinach. I think kale varies a lot from bunch to bunch and sometimes it can be rather strong/ bitter. When all is said and done I admit I (my taste buds) prefer spinach. But ya have to experiment to find out for yourself.

    elissa (d37ab6)

  135. “It sounds like you’re saying you’re willing to mock the views, but not refute them. That sounds a lot like what the WaPo reporter did in the piece linked in the post.”

    Patterico – It may sound that way, but I have no interest in reading any more of Ron Paul’s excreta than I did prior to the 2008 election, which would be necessary to have a reasoned debate with you about his views on the subject mentioned. Just not on my bucket list.

    I wasn’t suggesting a debate about his views on the subjects mentioned, but rather a debate about the issues themselves.

    You had originally said:

    JRM – Dude, don’t worry about that other cray cray stuff, Nor Luap is SPOT.ON. on when it comes to secession, plus he’s an advocate for smaller government and FIAT MONEY is going to kill us all.

    We don’t need to debate his views on these issues, as they are clear and well known. Secession? He’s for the right to do it. So am I. Smaller government? He’s for it and so am I. Fiat money? He’s against it and so am I.

    So the interesting debate would be about the issues themselves, as I think he is absolutely correct on these issues. You seem to think these positions are laughable. I signaled my willingness to discuss any one of them or all of them. It doesn’t appear that you want to. You simply want to mock, is the way it seems to me, rather than discuss.

    When I made that point, you responded as follows:

    “It sounds like you’re saying you’re willing to mock the views, but not refute them.”

    Patterico – I think we’ve had several discussions on fractional reserve banking and fiat money, but cherry picking a few of Ron Paul’s less crazy positions to debate in my view is sort of like saying Idi Amin was a real monster overall, but he was kind to animals and favored protecting the environment.

    Is there a Godwin’s law for Idi Amin? I understand an analogy is not the same thing as an equation, but that analogy seems a bit overwrought. Your using that analogy to compare Ron Paul to the bloodthirsty Idi Amin is like comparing a mouse in your kitchen eating some of your cheese to the Holocaust, Stalin’s purges, and the Spanish Inquisition combined. (See what I did there?)

    If we’re really going to debate Paul’s positions rather than the underlying issues — and they seem somewhat relevant since the media will try to do spillover onto Rand, but I thought you didn’t want to have that debate — then I am happy to do that. His sensible positions are legion. The positions with which I disagree primarily revolve around foreign policy and law enforcement, which are my typical areas of disagreement with libertarians. (There is plenty of grist for criticism for statements made his supporters, as in the newsletters, or Paul Craig Roberts’s recent nonsense, but that is a topic on which Matt Welch, you, and I all agree, and I’d rather stick to Paul’s actual beliefs articulated by the man himself.)

    I cannot take somebody like Ron Paul who said during 2012 that our border fence is to keep Americans in rather than immigrants illegal out among his other loonier pronouncements seriously no matter how much you may like his positions on a couple of issues.

    I contend that saying “our border fence is to keep Americans in” is a distortion. Paul was warning that a fence could be used against us in the future to keep us in, should real economic turmoil hit. Here’s the quote. Anyone interested in our discussion can watch it now.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=esp-ruhkZqQ

    Paul, as a libertarian, is generally very, very, very suspicious of government — and when you combine that with his (I believe correct) forecast that our country could hit hard economic times without precedent, I believe his point is that countries have in the past used fences to keep people in rather than out. The Commies in East Germany called the Berlin Wall the Antifaschistischer Schutzwall — an “Anti-Fascist Protection Rampart” designed to keep those damned fascists out.

    His words, viewed for what he actually said rather than through the lens of your characterization, and understood in the context of a strong belief that we are headed off the economic cliff, don’t strike me as loony at all.

    Is there something you want to debate? Is it Paul’s beliefs? Or the issues themselves? Or do you simply want to sit on the sidelines and throw rotten fruit at the participants?

    I am happy to have any discussion you are willing to have.

    Patterico (9c670f)

  136. Patterico, I have to agree with daleyrocks regarding the Paul family. Ron Paul does not support America as much as he supports his political theory of “Libertarinaism”.

    Or something like that.

    He certainly is an advocate for freedom, and no, he does not support America when it acts against freedom. And?

    Patterico (9c670f)

  137. Societies are consensual. Contract law has nothing to do with it. It’s friends and families rules.

    Ah, nk, would that we lived in the world of Althusius. Instead, we face Hobbes’s Leviathan everywhere we turn.

    Patterico (9c670f)

  138. Given the reference to Chris Kyle, this may be of interest. Found through a link from DNF’s link re Russia.
    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-01-27/and-wealthy-men-were-enthralled-chris-kylethe-american-sniper

    kishnevi (3719b7)

  139. Mr.Malynn, I think you do not quite understand what Dr.Paul means by blowback. Actions have consequences. If America acts in a way which impedes others from acheiving their goals or harms their perceived interests in some way, it should expect those others to take actions which are hostile to America. American foreign policy impeded jihadi goals. American ideals were a counterforce to jihadism. FDR imposed an oil blockade on Japan, and Pearl Harbor was the blowback. The Taliban provided aid and refuge to alQaeda, and our invasion of Afghanistan was the blowback.

    kishnevi (294553)

  140. 139. Patterico I am reluctantly going to say this, and I hope you are willing to read it in the entirely friendly way in which I intend. When you decide you want to discuss or debate something that interests you, I’m sure you’ve noticed that sometimes readers jump right in eagerly because it interests them, too. And other times readers don’t seem too interested in that particular topic and so they (we) kind of amble around and talk around it or about something else entirely. But when you decide you really, really want to discuss or debate something that interests you, you sometimes come across the web as goading or hostile or testy–IDK, maybe kind of like a prosecuting attorney :) toward the people who do actually attempt to respond to you. Now, clearly this blog is your property and every single one of us appreciates it. It is possible that you believe that in order to play here, people who come and freely avail ourselves of your pixels and music and great threads and community repartee and fun also have the responsibility to engage directly with you in discussions of your choosing in the manner of your choosing. I guess I could understand that view. But it seems to me that trying to force discussion is both off-putting and counterproductive.

    elissa (d37ab6)

  141. Kish, Steve is fine.

    Blowback is a word fetish – it is a made up word that does not really denote any reality, it is used to obscure rational thinking.

    Actions have consequences, absolutely – lets discuss cause and effect, even unintended consequences. But Blowback does not explain cause or effect.

    Jihadism is an aggressive doctrine that justifies violence without regard to the conduct of the US. Nothing the US or France did caused the terrorism against Charlie Hebo and the Bakery in Paris.

    WWII Japan was expansionist – FDR escalated sanctions in an attempt to stem that expansion – but one or the other would need to retreat – the blockade did not cause the attack on Pear Harbor, FDR’s refusal to accept Japanese expansion ensured the conflict – not any specific sanction.

    Yes, if you refuse to accede to extortion, conflict may result – but it is the height of moral relativism to claim “Blowback” caused the aggression.

    Steve Malynn (6b1ce5)

  142. Ron Paul’s brand of libertarianism would have been perfect in the 19th century, the first half better. See, http://mises.org/library/herbert-spencer-social-darwinist-or-libertarian-prophet Now, it requires what we would consider a dystopic environment.

    nk (dbc370)

  143. 142. Tamerlane exterminated for a time the death cult known as ‘the Assassins’, in one city of 3 million killing every living thing even dogs and cats.

    Darned if they haven’t returned. Oh, bother, our XBox will be obsolete when we get back.

    DNF (70d100)

  144. Running to a fight doesn’t necessarily follow from a sadistic desire to kill, or in the words of our modern day Goethe, ” thrill seeking”, but often to oppose evil.

    DNF (70d100)

  145. 144. Also sometimes their big mouths get they ass kicked.

    DNF (70d100)

  146. “I wasn’t suggesting a debate about his views on the subjects mentioned, but rather a debate about the issues themselves.”

    Patterico – The post was about Ron Paul. Was I unclear about who’s views you believed I was mocking? Why would you suggest debating somebody else’s views? That makes no sense.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  147. “Is there a Godwin’s law for Idi Amin?”

    Patterico – Not that I’m aware of, which is one of the reasons I picked Idi. Is there something unclear in what I have said? Do you need me to clarify something?

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  148. Patterico – Not that I’m aware of, which is one of the reasons I picked Idi. Is there something unclear in what I have said? Do you need me to clarify something?

    I assert to you that Ron Paul’s views on secession, fiat money, and smaller government are almost indistinguishable from my own.

    Therefore, if you’re mocking those views, you’re mocking my views on those issues.

    Which you have every right to do, but I ask whether you are willing to debate me on my views on those issues.

    So, clarify this: are you?

    If you are not, then you are mocking my views but unwilling to debate them with me. If that is the case, then it speaks for itself.

    Patterico (9c670f)

  149. “I contend that saying “our border fence is to keep Americans in” is a distortion. Paul was warning that a fence could be used against us in the future to keep us in, should real economic turmoil hit”

    Patterico – I disagree. He says the fence is also a hit on the American people, by which I take it he means the cost but he says what we really need are jobs. The word future is not in the clip. He says in economic turmoil people may want to leave. The Obama Administration had been four years of economic turmoil as of 2012. It was a paranoid conspiracy theorist comment to make, which is something he is well known for.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  150. Re: 140 – I’ll argue that an Isolationist or a Pacifist is not arguing for freedom. Western Civilization is not the Norm of human history, it is an aberration that needs and deserves protecting. http://acecomments.mu.nu/?post=354537

    Modern Western civilization is an aberration. The environment of freedom, productivity, wealth, tolerance and leisure that all of us enjoy has been around for a few hundred years at most, and on only a small portion of the planet at that. All of the rest of human history, heck the rest of the world today, tells a far different story, one where none of these leftists would even be allowed to exist. Oh, I suppose a vanishingly small percentage of them would be able to worm their way into the ruling class, but the majority would be utterly crushed. Can you imagine a thriving feminist movement in Saudi Arabia? Gay rights parades in Iran? Race baiters living off of the guilt of society in Middle Ages Europe? Hell, they were all the same race and they killed each other by the millions. When we see women getting their heads chopped of in Riyadh, or gays hung from gantry cranes in Teheran, or Boko Haram slaughtering entire villages, it isn’t a “tragedy”, it isn’t a “shame”, it isn’t “barbarism” (actually, it is all of those things), what it is is the NORM. This is how human beings have behaved since the dawn of time.

    It’s the norm everywhere but here, that is. Now, there’s noting different about us compared to anybody else in the world. People are people after all. But what is different is Western culture, and that’s due the intersection of three great concepts over thousands of years. Think of it as a real life example of Sid Meier’s Civilization. In that game, as civilizations discover new ideas and technologies, they are able to do new things. A civilization that has domesticated horses and learned to work bronze can produce chariots, for example. Without both advances, chariots are impossible. Let’s follow this in real life.

    The first leg of the three legged stool that supports Western civilization came from the Jews, and it’s monotheism. The idea of one God as opposed to many different gods begats the concept of absolute right and wrong, which is necessary in order to have the concept of morality. Morality is what takes humans away from a world where might makes right.

    The second leg came from the Greeks and Romans, and that’s the idea that the world has certain natural laws, that these laws are universal, and that they can be studied and understood and even manipulated. From this comes science, of course, but a better term for this would be reason.

    Finally, from the Anglo-Saxons we got the concept of rule of law. Just as there are universal natural laws that govern nature, so too must man’s laws for governing man must be universal. Nobody is above the law, thus everyone is treated equally. Equality is the third leg.

    Morality, Reason, Equality. I wish I spoke Latin, because I’d incorporate the three words into a personal coat of arms. The melding of these three concepts is what produced the West as we know it today. Islam certainly has it’s own morality, but reason is subordinate to it and the concept of equality is foreign. Communism, Fascism, Marxism, Socialism and all of the other left wing totalitarian systems claim to be based upon reason, but what morality there is is subjected to an ever changing “greater good” as determined by a small elite which shoots rule of law right in the head. In fact, rule of law doesn’t exist in any totalitarian system or oligarchy.

    No, Western culture is the only place that all three have gained equal ascendancy, and that brings us back to where we started, because leftist political ideology is dedicated to destroying all three of the legs upon which our society rests.

    Are you saying our interventions into the middle east have been counter to freedom?

    No, we have imperfectly executed a defense of our culture abroad, as we denigrate it here at home. We have defeated enemies, and failed to support allies to replace them – and the resulting vacuum causes more problems to resolve. But resolving those problems requires rational analysis, and Pacifism or Isolationism do not provide that analysis.

    No blood for oil is a slur. It is not why I went overseas during my 26 year career. It is not why our leaders sent us.

    Steve Malynn (6b1ce5)

  151. Here’s the problem with blowback, the common event from Afghanistan to check mia to Iraq to syria, isn’t the us. It’s saudi general intelligence, the is I and their analogies in doha

    narciso (2a9a02)

  152. Ron Paul’s brand of libertarianism would have been perfect in the 19th century, the first half better. See, http://mises.org/library/herbert-spencer-social-darwinist-or-libertarian-prophet Now, it requires what we would consider a dystopic environment.

    The biggest problem with Ron Paul’s foreign policy is that nuclear weapons exist.

    I opposed the Gulf War — not a popular position these days — but I was not a pacifist. I was furious that Clinton would not bomb North Korea. Because North Korea was developing the bomb, and Clinton let him.

    I was opposed to the Iraq War at first. I gradually came around to a reluctant endorsement, right around the time I started writing this blog, mainly because I believed Saddam might have WMD and we could not risk that in a post-9/11 world.I have come to see the Iraq War as a mistake — also not a popular position.

    I am skeptical, very skeptical, of military involvement when we are not attacked.

    But the bomb is different. I believe it will very possibly lead to the end of human civilization.

    Patterico (9c670f)

  153. Patterico – I disagree. He says the fence is also a hit on the American people, by which I take it he means the cost but he says what we really need are jobs. The word future is not in the clip. He says in economic turmoil people may want to leave. The Obama Administration had been four years of economic turmoil as of 2012. It was a paranoid conspiracy theorist comment to make, which is something he is well known for.

    I used to laugh at Ron Paul and dismiss him as a lunatic. I now regret that. I think it was a lazy position that I was fed by the establishment.

    It took listening to Tom Woods, who lines up with Paul in just about every respect, but whom I find to be a tremendously persuasive speaker and thinker, for me to give Ron Paul a chance. When I did, I concluded that I disagree with him and Woods on foreign policy and law enforcement, pretty strongly, but that I found almost everything else they have to say to be compelling. They have both given me a greater appreciation for free markets and skepticism about government intervention than I had previously held — and I had been most of the way there already.

    I am not an anarcho-capitalist, but their beliefs (especially the realistic ones) line up very nicely with the beliefs of the Founding Fathers in many respects. Including non-interventionism!

    Except nobody had the bomb when Thomas Jefferson was around. And the Woods/Paul folks don’t really have much convincing to say about what to do about crazies getting the bomb.

    Patterico (9c670f)

  154. Back to 97.

    Societies are consensual. Contract law has nothing to do with it. It’s friends and families rules.

    nk (dbc370) — 1/27/2015 @ 10:18 am

    I would agree if our Nation had arrived simply as a result of kinship ties to the land, but the United States formed from a specific and unique dedication to an idea based upon creating a social compact. It was first justified with relation to free association in the face of despotism, and then a detailed and specific compact was arrived at – and not just one, but a corrected compact, with detailed democratic forms for updating that compact. Yes, I fully concur consensual agreements can sunder the union – but in our case it requires adhering to the forms set forth in the agreement as amended.

    Steve Malynn (6b1ce5)

  155. FWIW, I don’t think the bomb per se is the issue,
    but the issue that significant damage can be done from a great distance without conventional military movement,
    i.e., the oceans don’t protect us as they once did
    and direct military attack is not the only way to do damage

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  156. Jefferson did have Islamic terrorists putting Americans in danger, though, even without a bomb.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  157. And Contract is consensual law. That really is the most Libertarian form of law there is, perfectly adheres to the doctrine of subsidiarity.

    Steve Malynn (6b1ce5)

  158. The Barbary pirates were the reason the French ultimately went in Algeria, it took them 17 years to ultimate conquer it for a time

    narciso (2a9a02)

  159. Patterico, I am a great believer in Federalism, and the doctrine of subsidiarity, but along with Western Civilization, the Nation State (as developed in the Enlightenment) has been the greatest boon to the concept of individual rights. A libertarian society cannot derive from anarchy – the ideals of liberty derived from the concept of rights a Government would enforce, we can argue unalienable and natural rights all we want, but without a State to secure them all devolves to force.

    Steve Malynn (6b1ce5)

  160. Regarding secession, it seems to me when you enter a compact, you need to use the same formality in order to exit the compact. Straight-forward contract law.

    Thus, if it took 2/3 vote of all members to initiate the compact, or to later join the compact, it would take the same vote to exit the compact, barring some specific mechanism set forth in the compact to dissolve it.

    The fact of the matter, the Founders understood contract law, they even understood forming compacts – the lack of a written exit mechanism was intended, so I would argue the only way to validly sunder the compact is with a vote. Unilaterally leaving a contract is a breach.

    Virginia’s ratification explicitly provided that they would not be subject to Congress exercising unenumerated powers, and if it did, they would be exonerated from the pact.

    Had you told Virginians that they would not be allowed to secede once they joined, they never would have voted to ratify the Constitution. This is not a particularly controversial assertion, and Virginia is hardly alone in that respect.

    But it’s CRAZY, INSANE, and LOONY to suggest that political boundaries might be redrawn in any different way than the sacred way they are drawn now. Scotland might validly vote on self-determination, but anyone suggesting that states have the same power here is a Dangerous Radical and probably a Neoconfederate who needs to have their mental health examined. Why, haven’t they heard of the Civil War??

    Patterico (9c670f)

  161. Steve, I have no interest in defending Western Civilization, so-called. I think our legitimate foreign policy should be ficused on defending America, not defending freedom as some ideal. It is our job to keep the crazies from nuking us. If preventing them from nuking others, so much the better. But let that be a side effect, not a goal.

    kishnevi (a5d1b9)

  162. Patterico, I am a great believer in Federalism, and the doctrine of subsidiarity, but along with Western Civilization, the Nation State (as developed in the Enlightenment) has been the greatest boon to the concept of individual rights. A libertarian society cannot derive from anarchy – the ideals of liberty derived from the concept of rights a Government would enforce, we can argue unalienable and natural rights all we want, but without a State to secure them all devolves to force.

    Thank you, Thomas Hobbes, but a) I am not an anarchist, and b) we are discussing the form the state might take. I assert that the form we took at the founding of this country, with several sovereign states and a Congress with strictly enumerated powers, was more conducive to liberty than one ruled by a national government such as we have now. It was not perfect — they did pass the Alien and Sedition Acts fairly rapidly — but there was a Thomas Jefferson quickly in office to pardon the “offenders.” Meanwhile, since FDR we have had a Congress that believes it can tell us whether we can grow our own crops on our own land. Economic freedom is a joke and a distant memory.

    In an area ruled by many sovereigns, when one government impinges on our freedom we may travel to another with fairly little trouble. Facing today’s Leviathan, the task is not so easy.

    Patterico (9c670f)

  163. “I assert to you that Ron Paul’s views on secession, fiat money, and smaller government are almost indistinguishable from my own.

    Therefore, if you’re mocking those views, you’re mocking my views on those issues.

    Which you have every right to do, but I ask whether you are willing to debate me on my views on those issues.”

    Patterico – I mock Ron Paul’s overall positions as a politician because he is a grab bag of fringe non-mainstream positions that have no chance of implementation, hypocritical semi-mainstream positions and god knows what else. If your overall portfolio of positions matches Ron Paul’s then I mock you as well and have no interest in debating you.

    I disagree with you on fractional reserve banking and fiat money as do many other commenter here and we had several discussions on that last year. I have taken no position on secession. I already expressed and explained my doubts over the seriousness of Ron Paul’s commitment smaller government when you brought it up in a prior posts.

    I am in favor generally of smaller government, but the path there for me depends on realism not fantasy.

    If there is something I have said that I have not supported I leave it up to you to specifically point it out, but moving the goal posts as you did in #139 does not do you any credit.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  164. “I used to laugh at Ron Paul and dismiss him as a lunatic. I now regret that. I think it was a lazy position that I was fed by the establishment.

    It took listening to Tom Woods, who lines up with Paul in just about every respect, but whom I find to be a tremendously persuasive speaker and thinker, for me to give Ron Paul a chance.”

    Patterico – I still laugh at Ron Paul but not because I was fed positions by the establishment. You have to wonder about somebody who appears regularly on Alex Jones’ show. I have also tried hard to make it through a few of the Tom Woods links you have provided here and typically zone out before they are through. I even tried one twice.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  165. Steve at 161. Well, no. Some “contracts” are consensual, like the attorney-client or physician- patient or the marriage/domestic partner contract or just the common law business partnership contract. They can be broken for no other reason than that one person no longer desires the relationship and the only question is the division of the hereto commonly-held property. But would you really call these relationships contracts without the quotation marks? If you’ll look over the Declaration of Independence, in addition to the plain language “deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed”, don’t the Grievances look a lot like a divorce petition alleging spousal abuse?

    nk (dbc370)

  166. If there is something I have said that I have not supported I leave it up to you to specifically point it out, but moving the goal posts as you did in #139 does not do you any credit.

    Trying to figure out what you’re saying does not constitute “moving the goal posts.” Throughout the thread it is has been quite unclear to me what you’re criticizing. I won’t say you are moving the goal posts from criticizing particular issues to criticizing a particular person and back, because I have known you a long time and would not casually accuse you of intellectual dishonesty when it’s possible that I am just misunderstanding you.

    If your overall portfolio of positions matches Ron Paul’s then I mock you as well and have no interest in debating you.

    Except that you know, because you have been reading what I have been saying, that this is not the case. So why take the time to write that when you know it doesn’t apply?

    Patterico (9c670f)

  167. Heh, reducio ab adsurdum much? RE 164

    But it’s CRAZY, INSANE, and LOONY to suggest that political boundaries might be redrawn in any different way than the sacred way they are drawn now. Scotland might validly vote on self-determination, but anyone suggesting that states have the same power here is a Dangerous Radical and probably a Neoconfederate who needs to have their mental health examined. Why, haven’t they heard of the Civil War??

    Virginia passed its Act of Secession prior to any unenumerated powers being attempted by the Federal Government – Now, 160 years later, I will absolutely agree, the 20th century jurisprudence and statutes of the US has destroyed the government we inherited from our founders – but not so much in 1860. Unfortunately the Courts simply abetted what our elected officials allowed. We did it to ourselves democratically. You cannot argue that the Civil War was based on any libertarian grounds – as much as you can wish for an ante bellum size of government.

    Steve Malynn (6b1ce5)

  168. Patterico – I still laugh at Ron Paul but not because I was fed positions by the establishment. You have to wonder about somebody who appears regularly on Alex Jones’ show. I have also tried hard to make it through a few of the Tom Woods links you have provided here and typically zone out before they are through. I even tried one twice.

    That’s fine; the fact that I accepted a lazy line uncritically does not mean others reached their conclusions the same way, or that I am claiming they did.

    His associations are not ideal. carlitos would be scandalized! (In fact, I think he is.)

    Patterico (9c670f)

  169. NK = absolutely, looks like a divorce petition. Of course when the Declaration of Independence was drafted, Divorce was not easy – no longer impossible, but certainly not simply throwing out the old.

    And the entire language emphasizes the extreme nature of getting the divorce. As much as the South complained, when they rebelled they were displaying sour grapes after dominating the Union for nearly 70 years. Secession was pique at getting overtaken, pure selfishness dressed up as “honor.” Nope, I will not grant this movement any honor for acting to preserve slavery in the face of modernity.

    Steve Malynn (6b1ce5)

  170. I think we are arguing over legal semantics, myself, to tell you the truth. I’ll stop.

    nk (dbc370)

  171. Mrs. Rubio is not a very good driver, apparently. It’s OK though. No one was hurt and there were no dogs on the roof of the car. Did you know by the way that Jeanette Rubio is a former Miami Dolphins cheerleader?

    pagesix.com/2015/01/27/marco-rubios-crashes-family-car-into-porsche/

    elissa (d37ab6)

  172. “Trying to figure out what you’re saying does not constitute “moving the goal posts.” Throughout the thread it is has been quite unclear to me what you’re criticizing.”

    Patterico – Asking me to debate you on secession, smaller government, and fiat money when it was perfectly clear I was criticizing Ron Paul constitutes moving the goal post, that is until you make it clear your positions are in perfect alignment with Paul’s on those issues.

    Reading the thread, other commenters did not seem to share your difficulty in sussing out that I was criticizing Ron Paul on this thread.

    The problem I see is that I think you are more sane than Ron Paul on most issues so I am not tempted to mock you in the same manner, but you are getting more strange.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  173. The problem I see is that I think you are more sane than Ron Paul on most issues so I am not tempted to mock you in the same manner, but you are getting more strange.

    Hahaha. Yeah, standing up for real liberty is increasingly strange in this country. I should learn to be quiet about things like a free market in money and interest rates, or self-determination for states. Romney-approved centralized control is so much more … normal.

    Patterico (89b937)

  174. Right, and the rest of us just want fake liberty. Explain your proposal, give a little more than a bitchen sound bite.

    For what it’s worth, my reform proposals are probably as pie in the sky as yours – an honest to goodness Constitutional Convention to reform the Commerce Clause and abolish Federal Criminal Statutes, other than UCMJ and have espionage, terrorism & piracy punishable by military tribunal.

    Steve Malynn (b696b3)

  175. It’s like this. What Ron Paul says is nutty, but he isn’t. And Rand Paul does not want to repudiate his father – he’s edging away from him, but he’s got to sound at least partly like he has no disputes, and as a result, none of what he says is any way unconstrained thinking.

    Sammy Finkelman (e806a6)

  176. Well Ron is all too willing to embrace the left critique of American foreign policy, he was arguing
    the Christic hymnal when he was on the Morton Downey Jr show in ’87

    http://therightscoop.com/sarah-palin-i-along-with-others-on-a-deep-bench-are-no-doubt-thinking-about-2016/

    narciso (ee1f88)

  177. Right, and the rest of us just want fake liberty. Explain your proposal, give a little more than a bitchen sound bite.

    You seem to be new to the blog, so poke around. There’s elaboration in the archives as far as the eye can see and a handy search engine to get you there.

    I recently read Ron Paul’s “End the Fed” and “Revolution” — two more books than any Ron Paul critic here has read. They can’t be bothered to learn the positions of the man they criticize, even when the host of a blog they have read for years tells them there is something there. You want proposals, he’s got them.

    I’m warning you though: they’re “strange” (defined as rejecting the eternal wisdom of the central government in favor of the Founders’ vision). (Although even that is an overgeneralization; Ron Paul favors a Jeffersonian view over a Hamiltonian one.)

    Patterico (114097)

  178. Ron Paul was my congressman when i was little we used to go to his rallies and such and mom and dad would work on his campaigns and there was peace in the land, and bread on the table, and we dreamed big dreams of a big America, where freedom was regnant and possibilities infinite

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  179. Patterico – I disagree. He says the fence is also a hit on the American people, by which I take it he means the cost but he says what we really need are jobs. The word future is not in the clip. He says in economic turmoil people may want to leave. The Obama Administration had been four years of economic turmoil as of 2012. It was a paranoid conspiracy theorist comment to make, which is something he is well known for.

    “Think about those fences maybe being used against us, keeping us in” is a clear reference to the future.

    Admittedly, after watching it again several times, I did also notice this line:

    “I think this fence business is designed and may well be used against us to keep us in.”

    I agree that if the statement about “design” was not a misstatement that it seems a bit paranoid. It’s not like our government would ever use something like the terror threat to actually prevent us from flying. OK they did already but that was only for a few days and they had the best of intentions because of the climate of the country after 9/11. And I can’t imagine Ear Leader or someone similarly cynical and power-hungry (oh hi, Hillary, I didn’t see you standing there!) misusing a precedent like that because the media would never let him (or her or it) get away with it. Or something.

    On the “it could never happen here” argument, this guy puts it pretty well.

    Patterico (114097)

  180. Greenspan turned me into a Ron Paul fan on the Fed, and Bernanke kept me there, there are some caveats as I’ve mentioned before, on foreign policy, but you don’t have to buy the whole package,

    narciso (ee1f88)

  181. I wonder how long it is until Patterico goes full Ronulan and starts claiming that most terror attacks are false flag operations.

    OmegaPaladin (a0e77e)

  182. I can’t tell if Patterico is pro fence or anti fence. Not that it matters I guess, since there isn’t one.

    elissa (c56eee)

  183. daleyrocks,

    I’m struck by your statement that you believe in realism, not fantasy, as if the difference is clear. But one man’s successful innovation (or revolution) is a fantasy to most men.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  184. Moderation is the key with Ron Paul. His ideas work in America where people generally follow the rules, but they don”‘t work with the rest of the world where rules are optional. I think that’s why his foreign policy ideas don’t work.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  185. he really should shutter that institute, it does his son no favors, as I pointed out, last night, the Algerian intervention, originally was the result of the provocation of the Barbary Pirates, somewhat akin to what got the UK involved in Nigeria,

    narciso (ee1f88)

  186. Greenspan turned me into a Ron Paul fan on the Fed, and Bernanke kept me there, there are some caveats as I’ve mentioned before, on foreign policy, but you don’t have to buy the whole package,

    Agree.

    Well Ron is all too willing to embrace the left critique of American foreign policy

    Agree.

    I can’t tell if Patterico is pro fence or anti fence. Not that it matters I guess, since there isn’t one.

    Pro fence. Milton Friedman said you can have a welfare state or open borders, but not both.

    Moderation is the key with Ron Paul. His ideas work in America where people generally follow the rules, but they don”‘t work with the rest of the world where rules are optional. I think that’s why his foreign policy ideas don’t work.

    I think that is insightful. I have heard some of these libertarian philosophers talk about an anarchist utopia, and they shrug off the idea of strongmen taking over as irrational. “Why would they do that?” One of the things that frustrates me about Woods is that he is a historian who knows better and yet largely stands by and does not attack them on such premises. Why? Because he is the definition of a libertarian: someone who wants to be consistent on everything. LIbertarians want to be consistent on the “non-aggression principle” and it causes them to take unrealistic positions on law enforcement and national security, in my view. A little more “inconsistency” would be OK if we had a little more realism on human nature and its inherent aggression.

    Patterico (9c670f)

  187. ==Pro fence. Milton Friedman said you can have a welfare state or open borders, but not both.==

    Glad to hear it. Milton Friedman got it right in a soundbite and I’ve quoted him many times about this during conversations with people about illegal immigration. So what is your impassioned defense here of Ron Paul’s statements about the fence all about, then?

    Also,
    ==I recently read Ron Paul’s “End the Fed” and “Revolution” — two more books than any Ron Paul critic here has read. They can’t be bothered to learn the positions of the man they criticize,…==

    The kindest thing that be said for this statement of yours is that it is presumptous. I can’t say I’ve read all his books but I have read Revolution which I thought was well worth the time. I can’t speak for others here, but considering that a huge proportion of your commenters appear to be political junkies it seems highly unlikely that most of them have not read at least one if not more of Paul’s books. Why on earth would you assume they have not?

    elissa (c56eee)

  188. “I’m struck by your statement that you believe in realism, not fantasy, as if the difference is clear.”

    DRJ – I’m not sure why that statement would stand out for you. People have different opinions on strategy and tactics and goals that are achievable both short- and long-term. I consider politicians advocating practical positions which have no realistic possibility of achievement in the shorter-term, in my opinion, as spouting fantasy. Others may not share that view.

    If were are discussing abstract political or economic theory, that is a different matter.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  189. “I agree that if the statement about “design” was not a misstatement that it seems a bit paranoid.”

    Patterico – Thanks for taking a second look. Tie in what he said with his long-term advocacy for people buying gold or other precious metals (at least in newsletters and some TV spots) and how they then could leave the country with their wealth. Physically taking it with them rather than digitally transferring it becomes the only method and the more opportunities the government has to inspect or search you, the more opportunities you have to lose it. That is the more fully developed paranoia scenario of his long-held views.

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  190. So there’s no benefit to long-term strategy?

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  191. “So there’s no benefit to long-term strategy?”

    DRJ – Did I say that?

    daleyrocks (bf33e9)

  192. Patterico – Thanks for taking a second look. Tie in what he said with his long-term advocacy for people buying gold or other precious metals (at least in newsletters and some TV spots) and how they then could leave the country with their wealth. Physically taking it with them rather than digitally transferring it becomes the only method and the more opportunities the government has to inspect or search you, the more opportunities you have to lose it. That is the more fully developed paranoia scenario of his long-held views.

    Did you read the “it couldn’t happen here” link? That fellow made the excellent point that it once would have been considered paranoid to think the United States government might confiscate all citizens’ gold. But it happened.

    Of course, the “climate of the country” demanded it…

    Patterico (114097)

  193. You said you view political goals that can’t be accomplished in the short-term are fantasy.

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  194. Specifically, you said:

    I consider politicians advocating practical positions which have no realistic possibility of achievement in the shorter-term, in my opinion, as spouting fantasy

    Is that not a reasonable paraphrase of what you said? If not, then what do you mean?

    DRJ (a83b8b)

  195. The kindest thing that be said for this statement of yours is that it is presumptous. I can’t say I’ve read all his books but I have read Revolution which I thought was well worth the time. I can’t speak for others here, but considering that a huge proportion of your commenters appear to be political junkies it seems highly unlikely that most of them have not read at least one if not more of Paul’s books. Why on earth would you assume they have not?

    I probably painted with an overly broad brush but most of the critics I have seen here has been very dismissive of him and expressing the opinion that he is mostly a lunatic. To me that attitude is flippant and suggests a certain lack of familiarity with his views on a wide range of topics.

    I can’t rule out the possibility that there are people who (like me) would have some criticisms of certain of his views, and also (as I have) read one or more of his books. But it would be hard for me to believe that the typical person here could read “Revolution” and not come away impressed with a lot of the arguments.

    What did you think of it?

    Patterico (114097)

  196. Daley,

    If we are ever going to make headway on real freedom, we need to convince people that freedom is the best choice. I am bored with arguments over tactics and mostly leave that to others. My main goal here is to spread the message. I urge you and others to help.

    If you think I’m wrong on an issue we can debate it. But spending all day going around talking about how we have to be realistic does not help spread the message.

    Patterico (114097)

  197. Yello?

    Patterico (9c670f)

  198. FWIW, what I know of Ron Paul I had the opinion that his views of foreign policy do not take into account the huge differences in technology and global interconnectedness of today compared to 1787.
    That made him not a serious national candidate in my book, and I did not take the time to read anything by him on other issues.

    I think the world in 2015 is a place where almost everything is in our backyard, and a policy too heavily weighted to non-intervention is an invitation for the bad actors on the world stage to flex their muscles. Nature abhors a vacuum, and bullies will be bullies until someone stops them.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.7970 secs.